Transcript Highlights:

• You haven't reached out to the Trump administration? Mr.
• through the federal reporting outlets via other state agencies?
• , not happy to work with the Trump administration, and not providing any information to the Trump administration
• , not happy to work with the Trump administration, and not providing any information to the Trump administration
• Support coming from the federal government for any state.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Budget Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal Pipeline Administration agency, and so we enforce their rules, our statute.
• Drinking water standards under the prior administration. Prior administration. So I.
• Since taking office, EPA administration Administrator Lee Zeldin has announced several initiatives that
• Because we're only 45 days into this administration.
• Members, one quick administrative note.

Committee: Senate Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> administrative services. administrative services.
• this is going towards administr this is going towards administr administrative<02:50:58.319><c> costs
• </c> pays toward administrative pays toward administrative fees?
• </c><02:56:19.600><c> For</c><02:56:19.920><c> federal</c> for federal fiscal year 25.
• For federal for federal fiscal year 25.

Summary: House Finance Division 3 met in work session and opened with procedural remarks from the chair about the committee’s schedule, deadlines, and recommendation options, noting the meeting was advisory and no votes were expected. The first bill discussed, House Bill 1569, concerned repealing the directive to sell the Anna Philbrook Center for Children property in Concord. Testimony from DHHS and New Hampshire Hospital focused on whether the property could be subdivided, the relationship to Senate Bill 572, the status of the city of Concord’s first right of refusal, and the practical effects of a sale. Witnesses said the $5 million sale estimate was a budget assumption, that moving staff and equipment would create some relocation costs, and that the center had required significant recent maintenance and renovation spending. Members also discussed the number of transitional housing beds at the site, the temporary nature of those beds, and whether the property should remain available given hospital workforce and service needs. The committee then turned to House Bill 661, which had been recommitted for further review after new information emerged. The chair summarized federal developments, including a December 2025 ACF letter and a related executive order, as well as a federal HHS press release about states diverting foster youths’ Social Security survivor benefits. Representative Walner explained that amendment 3055H had been drafted to move the bill forward in smaller steps, with a fiscal note requested on the amendment because the original bill was viewed as too large and expensive. Members discussed whether the committee had received copies of the amendment and whether federal guidance or funding had changed the policy landscape. The discussion also included broader questions about foster youth benefits and whether federal action would support state implementation. One member cited ACF language stating that only 11 states had enacted policies to stop interception of survivor benefits and that technical assistance would be available to the remaining states. The meeting remained in work-session mode throughout, with no votes taken and no final recommendations made during the portion provided. The chair indicated the committee could return to the bills later in the month.

Transcript Highlights:

• 46.240><c> and</c> If [snorts] this administration and If [snorts] this administration and officials<
• </c> this last year from the federal this last year from the federal government.<00:07:50.800><c> If<
• The federal pressure is coming from.
• This administration wants trans people gone.
• This administration wants trans people gone.

Summary: State lawmakers, the attorney general, advocates, and parents held a press event responding to Children’s Minnesota’s announcement that it would pause some gender-affirming care for minors. Speakers, including Rep. Lee Finke, Hannah Edwards of Transforming Families Minnesota, and Jess Braverman of Gender Justice, said the pause was driven by federal pressure and threats from the Trump administration and HHS, not by medical best practice. They emphasized that gender-affirming care remains legal in Minnesota under the state’s Human Rights Act, Trans Refuge law, and insurance protections, and argued that interrupting care harms trans youth and families, especially those who moved to Minnesota for protection. Testimony focused on the emotional and practical impact on families: loss of trust in providers, delays in treatment, travel and intake wait times, and the stress of having to scramble for continuity of care. Speakers described the care as evidence-based, medically necessary, and life-saving, and said the federal government was using coercion and misinformation to intimidate hospitals and doctors. The attorney general said his office and coalition partners are litigating related federal threats, including a separate RFK Jr. declaration and proposed federal rules, and that Minnesota officials are working to preserve access and enforce state protections. In response to questions, speakers said the state’s legal tools are strong but limited against federal action, so they are relying on court challenges and enforcement of existing state law. They said Children’s Minnesota had been specifically targeted by federal officials and that the hospital’s pause was tied to that pressure. No votes were taken; the event ended with a call for continued public and institutional support for trans youth and for Children’s to resume care as soon as possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• This federal mandate gave... ...of Census Day, April 1.
• That's okay now in federal courts.
• So that was the Biden administration. Of course they followed the rules.
• But now the Trump administration, moving on, is revisiting that.
• I took administrative procedure law as a class. I know what it is.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> fear that the current Administration fear that the current Administration might<00:01:48.759><c>
• We need a coordinated federal response and federal resources to some of these threats, and we want to
• We need a coordinated federal response and federal resources to some of these threats, and we want to
• We need a coordinated federal response and federal resources to some of these threats, and we want to
• We need a coordinated federal response and federal resources to some of these threats, and we want to

Committee: Senate Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• You mentioned the federal government.
• Obviously, there's a lot of attention to what the federal administration is seeking to do with California's
• And would the state end up sharing our data with the federal government so the federal government can
• Additionally, the federal funding...
• Additionally, the federal funding landscape and uncertainties surrounding the consolidation of federal

Transcript Highlights:

• So this funding basically provides resources to improve elections administration for federal offices
• </c> our election officials from the federal our election officials from the federal government<00:42
• </c> work close with a number of federal work close with a number of federal agencies<00:42:29.319><c
• </c> um in this role of chief administrative um in this role of chief administrative law<01:24:50.400
• I'm an administrative law judge with the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings.

Committee: House Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:

• What was different in El Paso is there's a lot of federal property.
• we were allowed to keep it on federal property in El Paso.
• Changes in federal policy. We had the big shift west. The numbers were already down.
• We're working now really closely with the federal government on that.
• We work very closely with FBI and JTTF, and you heard the federal government even under the Biden administration

Committee: Senate Border Security

Summary: The Senate Committee on Border Security held its first hearing of the 89th legislative session, established a quorum, welcomed new and returning members, and adopted the committee rules without objection. The chair said the hearing would be limited to invited state agency witnesses and was intended as a status update for new members on current border operations, especially in light of the change in federal administration. Testimony came from the Office of the Attorney General, Texas Department of Public Safety, and the Texas Military Department. The Attorney General’s representative said border-related litigation is largely in a holding pattern while the new U.S. Department of Justice awaits additional leadership, and noted prior cases involving concertina wire, buoys, and the CBP One app. DPS described Operation Lone Star’s evolution from filling gaps when Border Patrol was overwhelmed to current operations focused on interdiction, criminal arrests, fentanyl and meth seizures, and national security concerns, while also noting improved morale and more voluntary deployments as border pressure has eased. The Texas Military Department reported more than 5,000 personnel on state active duty, extensive use of barriers, drones, boats, and rapid-response forces, and said Operation Lone Star has resulted in more than 531,000 apprehensions and a 90% reduction in illegal crossings. Members and witnesses discussed whether the state should maintain its current border-security footprint while federal policy settles, with the chair emphasizing preserving institutional knowledge and leaving tactical decisions to the governor. Questions also covered trooper fatigue, Border Patrol training under SB 602, and concerns about cartel-driven commercial trucking and fuel depots near the border. The committee heard that Border Patrol training with DPS has resumed, and the chair asked agencies to keep the Legislature informed as legal and operational circumstances change. No bills were heard and no votes were taken beyond adopting the committee rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are using federal IRS data.
• Administrative burdens.
• Yet corporations just received massive federal tax... ...and federal tax breaks.
• , including TRICARE for youth, the Veterans Administration for veterans, and now the federal employees
• However, the administration proposes to amplify federal cuts by being more expansive.

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• There are also some other pass-through activities, such as federal reimbursement for administrative activities
• He also said there are other pass-through activities, including federal reimbursement for administrative
• He added that there are other pass-through activities, such as federal reimbursement for administrative
• He also said there are other pass-through activities, including federal reimbursement for administrative
• He added that there are some other pass-through activities, such as federal reimbursement for administrative

Committee: House Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm also the Principal Deputy Public Administrator.
• It's the public administrator under state statute.
• The only fee in the program is a $35 annual federal fee set by federal Fee in the program is a $35 annual
• federal fee set by federal law, not the state, and it is only assessed after $500 in support is collected
• The federal grant pays... It's primarily funded by a federal grant.

Summary: The Assembly Judiciary Committee met without quorum for part of the hearing and proceeded on several bills, with testimony focused on probate access, domestic violence protections, child support services, and an immigration resolution. On AB 1660, the author and county public administrators said financial institutions often delay or refuse lawful requests for account information and assets, causing harm to estates and vulnerable people; banks and credit union representatives opposed the new penalties, arguing the underlying statute may be outdated and that fraud concerns require more verification. The author agreed to amend the bill to make penalties discretionary rather than mandatory, and the bill ultimately passed out of committee to the floor with a due-pass recommendation and later add-on approval. AB 1657, by Assembly Member Rogers, would bar courts from requiring domestic violence survivors seeking temporary restraining orders to notify the alleged abuser before filing; the Sonoma County district attorney and others supported it as a safety measure, and it passed unanimously to the floor with multiple members requesting coauthor status. The committee also heard AB 1643, which would automatically enroll custodial parents in child support services after a support order is entered unless they opt out. The author and child support officials argued the bill would increase access to free enforcement and collection services, reduce child poverty, and help families who do not complete the current application process; some members raised concerns about fees, opt-out clarity, and whether automatic enrollment could interfere with amicable co-parenting arrangements. After discussion about the program’s funding and the need for a clear opt-out process, the bill was moved to the Human Services Committee, with some members voting no or not voting and later add-on action placing it on call and then advancing it. The committee also considered SJR 8, urging Congress to modernize the federal immigration registry so long-term undocumented residents could qualify for lawful permanent residency on a rolling basis; supporters described it as a long-overdue pathway for immigrant families and workers, and the resolution was adopted to the floor after a vote and later add-on action. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly emphasized the need to balance enforcement, fraud prevention, and access to services. Several members supported the domestic violence and probate bills as necessary fixes to existing systems, while others urged continued work with stakeholders on standardized forms, clearer procedures, and modernized safeguards. The committee also took up consent items and add-ons, including AB 1597, AB 1651, and AB 1652 on consent, and later finalized votes on the measures discussed above.

Transcript Highlights:

• As the administration has determined that federal funds can't be used for it as originally intended,
• Because the federal funds that we received through the Federal Highway Administration, through those
• We developed the scope of work, and we immediately submitted it to the Federal Highway Administration
• If the administration is getting the use of still $50 million from the federal government, right?
• And some of us are very, I want to say nervous, but we're looking out for a federal administration that

Transcript Highlights:

• It aligns with federal law and national security.
• So this current administration has closed the border.
• Our federal government is obviously not going to do anything.
• allowances and federal law that we have to deal with.
• We need action, but we need federal action. Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> through reliable, flexible federal through reliable, flexible federal loans,<00:12:47.120><c> pushing
• . administration. administration.
• </c> returning to his position as the Federal returning to his position as the Federal Housing<01:06:
• </c> returning to his position as the Federal returning to his position as the Federal Housing<02:21:
• </c> federal overregulation. federal overregulation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the new law shifts a greater share of the administrative cost onto states by cutting the federal
• Last year, the majority of those federal reimbursements—79%—reimbursed counties for their SNAP administrative
• . federal fiscal year.
• We want to work with our federal partners and the federal administration to ensure that any changes that
• We want to work with our federal partners and the federal administration to ensure that any changes that

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• We have federal grants...
• Our disability determination services receives federal funding from the Social Security Administration
• In addition to federal funds... Funding from the Social Security Administration.
• So they're having to relinquish those federal funds back to the federal government.
• We also are responsible for several federal reports that we send to the Rehabilitation Services Administration

Summary: The committee met to receive a detailed financial operations presentation from the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agency, with staff walking members through funding sources, budgeting, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and grants management. Sabrina Walker explained VR’s blended funding structure, including federal grants, state appropriations, program income, and interagency contracts, and emphasized that state funds are essential to meeting the federal match and maintenance-of-effort requirements. Members asked repeatedly about transparency, audit controls, and the risk that state cuts could reduce federal drawdowns; staff responded that all reports reconcile back to the SCEIS accounting system, are subject to state audits and internal reviews, and that even modest state reductions could significantly reduce total available funding. The committee also discussed pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities, with staff confirming services are offered through school districts, charters, and private schools, and that contracts are monitored for performance and compliance. The presentation then shifted to budgeting and internal controls. Walker described a zero-based departmental budgeting process, monthly monitoring reports, contingency reserves for unexpected expenses, and a formal annual cycle that culminates in board approval. Members asked about facilities tracking, culture, and how the agency maintains accountability; staff said facilities staff inspect buildings and equipment, supervisors justify line-item requests, and the process has become smoother over time as departments learned the system. Cynthia Johnson followed with an accounts receivable overview, describing invoicing, receipting, aging, customer verification, year-end reporting, and the use of cross-training, shared email inboxes, and spreadsheets as checks and balances. She also explained work training center billing, interdepartmental transfers, and the revolving fund used to issue consumer checks more quickly than standard vendor payments. Olivia Perez presented accounts payable operations, including invoice processing through SCEIS and OnBase, the three-way match, travel reimbursements, revolving fund checks, State Treasury Office interactions, and handling of reversals, rejections, and levy notices. She reported that AP processed 67,723 SCEIS payments, 13,670 case management system invoices, 3,379 travel reimbursements, and 15,693 revolving fund checks in fiscal year 2025, with only 70 payment rejections. The final portion of the meeting covered Grants and Funds Management, where Walker explained federal reporting, drawdowns, payroll allocation, asset tracking, lease and IT contract reviews, cost allocation, and closing packages. She noted upcoming system changes such as S/4HANA, Workiva, and SC Pro, but said the agency is receiving training and feedback opportunities. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the presentation portion beyond approval of the prior minutes and a brief recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• And while the federal administration has attempted to justify these cuts with arguments that the funds
• , the federal administration, also suspended millions of dollars in Title X family planning grants, and
• And again, the administration mentioned an attempt to address that issue.
• DHCS received critical federal approvals for BH Connect in December of 2024.
• captures projected expenditures of state, local, and federal funds.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> administrators we see that are failing. administrators we see that are failing.
• <00:38:20.960><c> administrator</c> administrator administrator administrator administrator timing<00
• . administration. administration.
• </c><01:05:34.640><c> I</c> federal some of those federal grants.
• I federal some of those federal grants.

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• It conforms to used oil programs to current federal regulations, federal use warrant on emergency funding
• Suggested by some in the federal government.
• Administrative completeness phase.
• I work part-time for a federal congressman, and I do casework. Part-time for a federal congressman.
• We’re talking about only administratively complete.

Committee: House House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee took up a series of water, mining, and regulatory bills. HB 2260 and HB 2986, both cleanup/technical measures, were passed unanimously with due-pass recommendations after brief staff presentations and no opposition. HB 2827, extending Pinal AMA groundwater fee authority and related fund timelines to support irrigation district infrastructure, also passed unanimously after testimony from district representatives about using the fees for wells, piping, and conservation projects tied to the loss of CAP water. The committee then heard HCM 2009, which urges Congress to amend the Antiquities Act, address split estate mineral rights, and streamline mining permitting. Mining industry testimony emphasized Arizona’s copper and critical mineral production and the economic and national security importance of access to mineral resources; opponents argued the memorial would undermine protected lands and conservation. The memorial passed on a 5-4 vote. HCR 2038, supporting a seven-state Colorado River agreement and Arizona’s position in ongoing negotiations, drew broad support from water interests and passed 9-1. HB 2078, clarifying that expanded public notice for aggregate mine reclamation plans applies only to new plans and not existing mines, passed 9-1 after the sponsor and industry witnesses said it was meant to match prior legislative intent. HB 2026, HB 2027, HB 2028, HB 2031, HB 2094, and HB 2095 were then considered as water-management bills. HB 2026 and HB 2028 passed 6-4 over concerns from ADWR, while HB 2027 passed 6-4 after adoption of a Griffin amendment despite strong opposition from CAP, municipal water users, ADWR, and several cities who warned it could weaken assured water supply protections and CAGRD replenishment obligations. HB 2031 and HB 2094 also passed on narrow 5-4 votes. HB 2095 was still under discussion at the end of the transcript, with opposition testimony from municipal water interests arguing that groundwater availability should be evaluated regionally rather than by a single-well or site-specific approach.